Thanks, I gather then that there will never be millions of relations etc in #1 then?
If so I might just create some dummy entity (that I will never have to scan/seq) and put it there. On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Alexander Burger <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 09:47:26AM +0200, Alexander Burger wrote: >> I always use the following pattern in such cases: >> >> (for (This (seq (db: +User)) This (seq This)) >> (when (isa '+User This) >> (doSomething This) ) ) > > BTW, I would be cautious using 'seq' in application code. It is a rather > low-level access to the database objects, and more typically used in > debug and maintenance code. > > If you want to use the above in a more generic way, you might consider > to use (isa '+Entity This) instead of a specific class. > > > Also, you might need to filter for other things too. For example, to > avoid collecting objects marked as obsolete (with the 'lose>' message), > you would do > > (for (This (seq (db: +User)) This (seq This)) > (and > (isa '+Cls This) > (not (: T)) > (doSomething This) ) ) > > as the 'T' property is set when 'lose>'ing objects. > > Cheers, > - Alex > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe
